Atheists Trade in Traditional Christian Symbols, Create Meaningful Icons of their Own

It’s that time of year again. The Holiday season is upon us, and with it comes classic Yuletide traditions such as eggnog, carols, the lighting of menorahs and decorating a Christmas tree. Ah yes, the Christmas tree, bedecked in lights, garnished with care and topped with…a flying spaghetti monster?

Instead of a star or an angel on top of ye ole Christmas tree this year, many atheists might surprise their family and friends with a proudly placed personified representation of a mound of spaghetti and meatballs atop their tree.

Why you might ask?

Katie Aston, a PhD candidate at Goldsmiths University in London researching atheist aesthetics and material cultures, suggests that such non-religious symbols, taken at face value as a joke, may serve similar purposes to explicitly religious images.

“The visual in a non-religious worldview, is of great importance,” Aston said, “it forms a vehicle for a number of ideas which either express or support the practice of a non-religious life and on occasion outwardly reject the religious images offered.”

Take for example the “Darwin Fish.” Often found on the back of cars in mock comparison to the ICTHYS fish found on the bumpers of Christians, the Darwinian alternative is intended to promote evolution and to show unequivocally that the owner of the vehicle is not Christian, not a creationist and most definitely does not believe in a deity.

It might be said that the symbol’s strength is found in its resemblance to a common Christian sign.

Similarly, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, a parodic deity meant to challenge Christian beliefs in God, is placed on top of the tree instead of an angel or a “Bethlehem star” pointing to Jesus’ nativity.

These atheist symbols use Christian images or icons and replace them with their own to establish a contra-identity. At times this re-branding, as it were, can prove provocative.

So why do atheists convert otherwise religious icons into secular symbols? Often times for impact.

“The use of a simple symbol in a film, a book or an advertisement says far more than any wordy explanation ever could” wrote Adele Nozedar in The Element Encyclopedia of Secret Signs and Symbols, “Signs and symbols, our invention of them and understanding of them, transcend the barriers of written language and are the very heart of our existence as human beings.”

And so, these secular symbols and icons of the non-religious communicate what it means to be an atheist or agnostic. They are defiant and often juxtaposed to classic religious symbols. But this only tells half the story, it only establishes what atheists and agnostics do not believe or who they are not.

“While atheism is the absence of religion, it is not only a negative category” said Aston, “the atheist identity culture generates images which reference both the negative worldview and the positive/existent worldview of rationalism, scientific empiricism and humanism.”

These positive symbols, rather than drawing on established religious images, are creative instead of ironic, meaningful on their own instead of mocking. They tell us what atheists are, in lieu of only what they are not.

Some of these symbols include the American Atheist’s atom, symbolizing the idea that science is the source of true knowledge and human advancement. Nazadar suggests the open ended loop at the bottom “represents the idea that there are questions yet to be asked and yet to be answered.”

Whether the symbols tell us what atheists think or what they don’t believe, whether they be “negative” or “positive,” they provide a window into a non-religious identity culture that is continuously emerging in modern Western society.

On the back of vehicles, tee shirts, billboards or even atop Christmas trees these images are intimations of what it means to be atheist in a world full of religious signs and symbols. They provide identity, meaning and comfort to the world’s non-religious.

As Aston concluded, “images used in ‘non-religious’ realms, can produce a similar sense of awe, a sense of the enormity of which we cannot know and a material, shared reference point for members of a community with similar world views.”

148 Responses

[...] has addressed the issue of Aesthetics in non-religious practice for the Houston Chronicle: http://blog.chron.com/sacredduty/2011/11/atheist-aesthetics/ including contributions from Katie Aston, web editor for the [...]

Symbols we can relate to are very important to have during holidays. Having done my postgraduate work decoding ancient symbols, and written a few books, I began to ponder which symbols to surround myself with this season. We need a reason to celebrate, a reason which is part of our worldview, that affects our spirit and emotions. This season, to me, is a celebration of the return of longer days, warmer weather, and blessings provided by the sun. Winter Solstice is the basis for most celebrations this time of year, even those represented by Christian iconography. Before the advent of the religious tradition, there was reverence for the life-giving sun, and an understanding of its cycles. During winter solstice the sun appears to stay still, at its lowest point on the analemma, for three days. Then it begins to climb again, bringing us more light than dark. This was the time of the birth of new life in Paleolithic cultures; the blessing of children was held in high regard as the only way to continue life.(ref: Duncan-Enzmann, Symbology: Decoding Classic Images.) So this season I celebrate the return of the Light, and the miracle of new human lives. http://www.whiteknightstudio.com

When the anti-Christian atheist supremacists turn their “wit” on Islam’s symbols, figures, and holy days, I’ll be willing to consider that their bigotry against “tolerance” for religious freedom is even handed. For now, they are known by the singular nature of their words and deeds. MERRY CHRISTMAS. God loves you too!

Don’t you watch South Park? I don’t believe any of the world’s religions were left unscathed — christians, mormons, jews, and muslims (this caused a major blow up from the islamic community that made the South Park creators replace Mohammad with a black box). The athiest creator of the show even made fun of athiests. It was supreme.

Jack, you clearly have no idea what you’re talking about. I have as much purpose in my life as any of my christian friends do. There is nothing lost about my life or my purpose. As an athiest I am much happier than many people I see who are troubled over why god doesn’t answer their prayers. They feel like they’re not worthy or not living righteously enough or that they somehow haven’t earned gods blessings. They feel they have to try harder so god will bless them. THAT is what is really sad.

Everyone is agnostic weather they want to say that or not, because NO ONE knows for sure. The thing that makes me distrust Christians is that they say they do, so they do not feel any moral obligation to the truth. The whole world would be a lot better off if we were all dedicated to the truth and simply admit that we don’t know.

Hi … I say I know without a doubt God is real and Jesus is His son … how do I know? Personal one on one time praying … spent so much time doing this that I had a personal encounter that forever set in stone my belief system … my experience will not change your mind or anyone else’s … it was meant for me. If you seek Him, you will find Him, but you have to put forth the effort and time to do so … all the best!

This statement is false for any reasonable definition of “to know”. What you have is a belief, not knowledge.

I don’t doubt your sincerity, but it’s simply wrong to claim you know something just because you believe it. By that standard, any child could claim to “know” Santa Claus is real, Hindus know Shiva is real, and atheists know gods don’t exist. The word “know” becomes useless through such abuse.

Word games are not truth. An agnostic is a person who does not believe that they can be certain. If someone has a belief, even one that is not well founded, it is not the same as believing it to be unfounded. This is not hard to understand, but when you set out to make a point for the sake of making a point rather than actually openly debating something, it is easy to say something even sillier than the position you are attempting to discredit.

@Bill Thacker:
By your reasoning, there is no knowlege in this Universe. Luckily, most of us are able to use language to convey meaning despite epistemological ambiguities inherent in making any statement whatsoever.

For example, if I guess correctly based on bad reasoning, is my belief knowlege anyway? If I am pretty sure about something, but have a shadow of doubt about it, is it knowledge if it turns out to be true after all?

In our language, we use the word “know” in many ways, including personal certainty, so we can say something like “I just knew he was guilty, but it turns out I was wrong”, and it is not really a contradiction.

When it comes to the initial question, of who is agnostic, and who is not, the “knowlege” represented by “gnostic” is “revealed knowlege”, such as our inate sense of fairness, our of good and evil. Although we may reason what sort of things fall into which category, the concepts are axiomatic, not actually derived by reason, but taken as a given when trying to decide what an instance of good or evil would be. Gnostics believed that not only the existence, but nature of God was axiomatic for those capable of understanding, so an a-gnostic is someone who does not share that belief in the knowability of the existence or nature of God is certain.

Hence, when someone “knows” that Jesus lives based on their own inate experience, your doubt that there is objective reality behind that knowlege is no more relevant than if someone were to doubt that knowlege is better than ignorance, which is just as unprovable, just as lacking in objectivity, and therefore just as “true” within the language we are limited to.

I understand your point that in our heads, we may “know” something that’s not proven or even false. My comment to Phantom was not based on his thinking, though; I was reacting to his words.

When I convert my thoughts into language to communicate them to others, I think honesty compels me to evaluate what I think I know against a more rigorous standard and ask, “Can I really say I know this, or is it possible I’m wrong?” If I don’t screen my words thus I run the risk of harming other people. Consider how you would react to these two statements from me:

“I know that snake at your feet is non-poisonous.”
“I think that snake at your feet is non-poisonous.”

If I utter the first sentence and you reach down to grab the snake and suffer a venomous bite, I think I’m culpable. I invited you to trust me, then carelessly told you something false. The second statement is a more honest, responsible representation of my real knowledge.

“For example, if I guess correctly based on bad reasoning, is my belief knowlege anyway?

I don’t think so. Consider Schroedinger’s cat, which is in an opague box and has a 50% chance of being killed. Until I open the box, I cannot possibly *know* whether the cat is alive. I may guess that the cat lives (reasoning that my love for the cat will shield him from the lethal poison), but it’s wrong for me to claim I *know* that. Even if the cat *is* alive when I open the box, I can’t apply that knowledge retroactively to say, “See, this proves I knew he was alive.” I was right, but I never knew.

“In our language, we use the word “know” in many ways, including personal certainty, so we can say something like “I just knew he was guilty, but it turns out I was wrong”, and it is not really a contradiction.”

Let me point out that this isn’t just a friendly chat. We are making permanent, written statements that can be read by every human being on Earth, with the goal of persuading readers to agree with us. We’re trying to manipulate other humans (albeit in a very mild way). A higher standard of truth applies here than applies, say, at a pep rally for your favorite football team where it’s OK to shout “we’re number one!” even if you’re in last place.

@Bill T
So, to sum up your statement, common usage of the language, complete with ambiguities is useless, and yes, you agree that in your view there is nothing in human experience that actually qualifies as “knowledge”, since certainty is never absolute.
It is most convenient to avoid his meaning by claiming you were responding to his words, when we both know that his meaning was not meant to be a new definition of knowledge, but an expression of his personal experience in terms we both seem to agree were apt for that expression, and not a treatise on the knowability of any physical or metaphysical as it pertains to anyone one else. By skipping over the Gnostic view of knowledge as a lingual reference, you simply deny the point, not disprove it at all.

Still, it is nice to banter with an actual thinker.

May reality bless you and keep you in whatever way it might be able to.

I’m sorry for all of you who have been forced to participate in CHristmas activities against your will. That is not what God wants. I do not suggest that I nor any other person on this Earth know what God”s plan is for us. But I do know that when you take Christ out of Christmas you take the perfect gift as well. Love. God didn’t come to the rich and powerful that night in Bethlethem. He came to the poor, lost, lonely and sick. He came with love and forgiveness. We use evergreens as a sign of eternity. Wreaths a sign of continuous love. The candy cane the shepherds staff. Red with the bood of his sacrifice and white with the purity of rebirth through Him. Angels and the star you know but Santa is a sign of giving. He shows love and kindness to all; yes there is a nice and naughty list but everyone drifts from side to side. They all still get a gift if not in present and package form then in a new day. A new friend. A refreshed hope. I could go on. I know that many of you will find this offensive or wrong but I love you still.

First you say, “That is not what God wants.” Which is a definitive statement. Then follow it with, “I do not suggest that I nor any other person on this Earth know what God”s plan is for us.” So, which is it? You know what big dude doesn’t want — and you’re sure of it — but not he wants?

May I suggest that you join me in the middle … hunched shoulders and all. NOBODY knows anything about any of this. It’s all guess work. Even the ones who wrote their “ideas” in the hole-y bible. So, if that’s where you’re getting your inspiration … then … well … okay.

I apologize if what I said was unclear. God does not want us to be forced to love Him. He wants us to choose to love Him. When I said I don’t know God’s plan I don’t. I will follow His teachings and trust in Him to lead me. My shoulders are not hunched. I know His love for me. I have been to the bottom of the well and finally looked up. I read His word and I cannot deny Him. I know Him. I know if you are looking for someone to talk with I can give you my e-mail. I know what He expects of my life (to bring others to love Him;; to witness) but I don’t know what’s going to happen tomorrow. I trust Him. I have faith.

I for one think this is good light-hearted fun. Thanks Ken for yet another great blog!

I also wonder if we Christians invested more time in living like Jesus than we do demanding cultural & aesthetic representations of Christianiaty (a CHristmas tree for instance, saying “Merry Christmas” etc…), perhaps we wouldn’t be such ripe targets for mocking.
It’s hard to mock someone sacrificially loving their neighbor or enemy. It’s easy to mock someone who equates faith with fashion, or Christmas with oppressive demands for conformity to a religion our constitution gives us freedom from.

Some small-mindedness is more chic than other small-mindedness. For every person who thinks that everybody should “know” what is so obvious that even his Mamma could explain it to him when he was three, there is one that assumes that if any bona fide idiot believes something, then it is wrong, even if what the idiot believes is that the Sun provides warmth. Many take their side to lesser extremes, but truth is not about what side you are on, even if the whole tired argument over who is right gets the most attention.

It is always easier to get a laugh when teasing the ones who seem less clever, even when the teasing is no more clever, just more chic.

The worst logic anywhere, which occurs on both sides of the faith issue, is that what is most advantageous to believe has anything at all to do with what is actually true.
The “why would anyone want to believe that?” argument is not an argument at all, even if it does seem to be the essence of modern political debate in America today.

“to be an atheist, it takes MORE faith in EVERYTHING and EVERYONE than it does to be a believer in a God/greater being.”

It’s not clear what you mean by that, or even why it’s important. If you think faith is good, you should conclude that atheists are better than theists, right?

But I don’t think that’s what you meant. And here’s why you’re wrong.

How did humans come to exist? I’d answer “through abiogenesis and evolution.” Most theists would answer, “because God made us.” Neither of us can be 100% certain of our answer.

But the theist can’t *admit* his uncertainty, because one statement of his faith is “God made man in His image”. If it didn’t happen that way, it casts doubt on the other claims of his religion and could even mean God doesn’t exist. The theist’s entire worldview depends on it being true that humans didn’t just evolve.

As an atheist, I have no problem with uncertainty about human origins. I’m pretty sure we evolved from dead matter, but if new evidence shows I’m wrong it won’t change my life one iota. In my daily life the question of human origins is trivial. (Of course, my daily life doesn’t involve biological research.)

I lack the sort of faith theists have because I don’t NEED it. My worldview doesn’t require such certainty about unimportant questions.

(This isn’t really an argument for or against, just my philosophy/theology…)

As a Christian, I actually agree with this statement. I also believe we “evolved from dead matter.” I don’t think a belief in evolution in any way diminishes my belief in God or, more specifically, Christianity.

I think the scriptures are all about life coming “from dead matter.” The Genesis creation story, after all, suggests that God created ex nihilo (from nothing). God Brings life from dead matter.

It also doesn’t bother me that what Genesis tells us probably isn’t literally what happened. Was the world created in 6 days? Probably not. Was there a talking snake in some primordial garden? I doubt it.

Some would say I’m a heretic because of this. But Genesis isn’t a science book. It’s a theology book. It tells us that God has given human being the imago dei (image of God). It tells us that all creation is good, but that it’s somehow broken (represented by the eating of the forbidden fruit and having to leave the garden).

I think the whole point is that God longs for a restored relationship with his creation. And that leads to what I think is the greatest example of life coming from dead matter–the resurrection of Jesus. (Which, just FYI, I do take to be a real historical event.)

Heh… All that fro Bill’s statement that “we evolved from dead matter.”

As an agnostic I will pass…Thats the problem with atheists…they seem to think that its important to mimic religions by doing things like this. I dont believe in God and I dont need symbols, I dont need an atheist bible, I dont need an atheist group to join and I dont need someone like Richard Dawkins making people think that all atheists are intolerable jerks who belittle other peoples beleifs…

The problem mosts Atheists have with religious is not religion, but the assumption that all that is good about them and for them comes from their belief. It is a matter of doctrine for many religions that if your parents raise you well, you will be a decent person, and if they don’t, you probably will not be, but many religious folks cannot fathom that this applies to other religions than their own, and even to (gasp) non-religious persons. It is observable that immoral people and moral people are in similar proportions among the religious and nonreligious alike, but ignoring what is observable is often a matter of faith for the religious more than it is for the nonreligious.

Hence, religious people tend to annoy Atheists the way any prejudiced majority annoys the minority targeted by the prejudice, and so you can expect a few humorous jabs in that direction from time to time.

“I dont need someone like Richard Dawkins making people think that all atheists are intolerable jerks who belittle other peoples beleifs”

I don’t think Dawkins ridicules peoples beliefs because he’s an atheist. I think he does it because he values truth.

When I ridicule theists it’s because they’ve made false claims about the truth. I think ridicule is the appropriate response because they’re being dishonest. To say you believe in God is just stating your opinion, but to claim you KNOW he exists is fraudulent. And for the record, I’m equally abusive to people who market perpetual motion machines, who practice homeopathy, or claim they can speak to the dead. And you should hear what I say about politicians!

I think the truth is too valuable to allow people to debase it so freely.

In his book “The True Believer”, Eric Hoffer pointed out that
dogmatic athiests and dogmatic believers in particular gods have
much psychology in common. They tend to switch from one dogmatism
to the other. Non-believers try to ignore the spat and trouble
but sometimes get run over by the former group.

While Atheists love to deny that they have Dogma, they live and die by the Dogma that anything not yet explained satisfactorily without requiring a deity, could be if we had all of the data and time to analyze it, and all explanations that are equally concise yet involve a deliberate choice by the system itself must be incorrect despite any observable data to the contrary. The only neutral position, and the only truly scientific one, is agnostic, not atheist.

Top Ten Signs You’re a Fundamentalist Christian
.
10 – You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.
.
9 – You feel insulted and “dehumanized” when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt.
.
8 – You laugh at polytheists, but you have no problem believing in a Triune God.
.
7 – Your face turns purple when you hear of the “atrocities” attributed to Allah, but you don’t even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in “Exodus” and ordered the elimination of entire ethnic groups in “Joshua” including women, children, and trees!
.
6 – You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about gods sleeping with women, but you have no problem believing that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed, came back to life and then ascended into the sky.
.
5 – You are willing to spend your life looking for little loopholes in the scientifically established age of Earth (few billion years), but you find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents and guessing that Earth is a few generations old.
.
4 – You believe that the entire population of this planet with the exception of those who share your beliefs — though excluding those in all rival sects – will spend Eternity in an infinite Hell of Suffering. And yet consider your religion the most “tolerant” and “loving.”
.
3 – While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed to convince you otherwise, some idiot rolling around on the floor speaking in “tongues” may be all the evidence you need to “prove” Christianity.
.
2 – You define 0.01% as a “high success rate” when it comes to answered prayers. You consider that to be evidence that prayer works. And you think that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God.
.
And most importantly, and oh so true:
.
1 – You actually know a lot less than many atheists and agnostics do about the Bible, Christianity, and church history – but still call yourself a Christian.

Christian’s don’t have to know anything about the bible, they just have to accept Jesus as their Savior. That is what a Christian is. Also, a lot of Christians don’t speak in tongues or think anyone can speak in tongues.

Ooohh! I love Bible verses!! How about this one?:
.
If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
.
(Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)

Another good one:
.
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.
.
(Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.
.
(2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)
.
Wow! Killing non-believers? Why that sounds like something a religion of peace would do.

Those are all from the Old Testament. The New Testament is what Christians go by. I happen to respect all peoples beliefs and don’t put down anyone who doesn’t believe the way I do. I wish other people could do the same.

Uh, yea ok. The money also has a pyramid on it. By your (lack of) reasoning, I guess that means that every time you or your family spend a dollar you’re admitting that Horus is the one true God. The money also has an olive branch on it. Since olives were grown in Greece I guess that every time you spend a dollar you’re admitting that Zeus is the one true God. The money also has an eagle and arrows on it, which were both important in Native American culture. I guess every time you spend a dollar, you’re admitting that the Spirit Mother is the one true God. Jeebus is gonna be mighty upset with you.

In the end, most “atheists’ will become just as religious and fanatical as the religious people they condemn but they will embrace a self-chosen smorgasbord of pagan practices that will allow them to behave as badly as they want without moral constraint.

Ultimately that is what “Festivus” and all the other related silliness is all about.

I agree Robert! It seems a lot of Atheists hate Christians for no reason. I respect the fact that Atheists don’t believe in a God. That is their choice, I choose to believe in God. He is my protector and provider. No human can protect me the way God does.

atheists are cranks. They should shutup and let those who celerbrate CHRISTmas enjoy the season. although I don’t go to church I would rather have christians living in the house next to me rather than atheists.
——————
Why can’t Christians shut up and leave me alone and not shove their beliefs down my throat? Because most hardcore Christians are to one sided and hard headed with closed minds.

Some of the commenters here need to learn a little more about the history of Christmas. Christmas trees weren’t used by Christians until sometime in the 1500′s. Even then most Christians were against using a symbol of Pagans. Pagans used trees to celebrate winter solstice thousands of years before Christ was born. So a tree, wreaths, giving to others isn’t solely a Christian tradition.

Some people can’t just leave others alone.
So you don’t celebrate Christmas or believe in God,
okay but why must these spagetti athiests take a swing at others
beliefs? Most true Christians don’t slamn or belittle ahtiests for not
believing in God.

No, most self-proclaimed “true” christians are too busy playing the victim to belittle or slam atheists for not believing in god. It always surprises me how a few manage to find the time but most of them seem too busy gathering together to resist the constant attacks they feel their faith is under from all directions. Never mind that we live in a country where you can’t walk 100 yards in any direction without running into tiny church led by someone who’s preaching “the REAL gospel” or that christians have television networks, businesses and book stores, laws that prevent others from doing what they please on christians holy days, and references to their deity everywhere you look. No, their religion is imperiled and under seige and must be defended. Good thing you managed to point that out before the atheists found a way to silence your post and muzzle yet another expression of your faith. People do what they want to on the holidays. I’m not a christian (you probably already figured that out) but I was raised by christians and I enjoy the gaudy materialism of the holiday all the same. I like the “Santa Clause/Christmas lights/Presents for everybody” Christmas but care nothing for the pretend birthday party side. Who cares what I put on top of my Christmas tree and why do you interpret it as an attack on christianity? It’s not you know. It’s just a trinket on top of a decorated tree that looks festive and gives me a place to put presents for people I care about. What really happens is that when atheists talk about what they’re doing for the holidays some poor, persecuted christian has to jump to the front of the line and cry about how picked on they feel. Why can’t you just not read about what atheists are doing and go away and have a “Happy Spagettius” or whatever floats your boat?

Some people can’t just leave others alone.
So you celebrate Christmas and believe in God,
okay but why must these believers take a swing at others for their non-
beliefs? Most Atheists don’t slamn or belittle believers for believing in God. It’s only when those beleifs are shoved down our throats, such as having it on our money that makes us want to challenge it.

Um….I don’t know what planet you’re living on but anyone who isn’t a “Christian” gets slammed EVERY DAY for not believing in JESUS as the lord savior blah blah blah. I know this for a fact and so do my kids.

First of all, atheists do not believe in nothing. They are actually “slightly” more belief oriented than those who identify themselves as agnostic. Agnostics choose not to believe in the existence or absence of God, but simply choose not to believe in anything. Atheists on the other hand choose to believe that God does not exist.

Secondly lets decouple atheism from the Flying Spaghetti Monster movement, they state on their website that they are not anti-religion, nor are they an atheist clubhouse. There are many participants who are agnostics and many who are religious. While several comment writers wish for these “atheists” to leave them alone, if you do a bit of research on the group you will find that quite the opposite situation is what started the group in the first place. In 2005 the Kansas State Board of Education decided to adopt new standards by allowing equal time to evolution and intelligent design. In protest of this decision Bobby Henderson wrote a letter to the board saying that he believes in a Flying Spaghetti Monster and that this belief system should also be afforded equal time in the classroom. I am not against people teaching their religious beliefs to their children, but a school classroom is the wrong place for it. Just as you don’t want atheists to force their beliefs on you, all children should not be forced to learn about your beliefs. This is the primary message of the FSM movement. The decision in Kansas was reversed a few years later with the election of new members to the board.

Now as for Christmas…yes, there is the religious holiday and some people’s treatment of the holiday may offend religious people; however, in the US Christmas has become both a religious and secular holiday in which people of all belief systems celebrate. And while there is a religious history with Christmas trees, they are utilized as a marketing icon throughout the months leading up to the holiday. Most of our jobs take Christmas off as a holiday and the religious aspects sometimes get lost amongst the holiday shopping, decorations around and the house, television programs, etc. In some respects, the Spaghetti Monster atop a tree is an interesting way to celebrate the secular aspects of the holiday and recognize that it is in a sense “forced” upon everyone.

You’re wrong about the agnostic definition. Agnostic comes from the Greek root of “gnostic” which loosely translates to knowledge, or proof. When used with religion, a gnostic person has knowledge or proof that a god exists and an agnostic person says that they have no proof or knowledge that a god exists. It is possible to be an agnostic while simultaneously being an atheist or a theist. Agnosticism is NOT “soft” atheism.

Theist and atheist have to do with belief, which is not the same as knowledge. A theist believes a god does exist. An atheist does not believe a god exists. It is possible to be an agnostic theist, or one who believes god exists but has no proof, just like it is possible to be a gnostic theist, or one who believes in a god and knows for themselves that god exists with certainty. The alternatives are agnostic atheism (one who doesn’t believe in a god, but can not say god does not exist with certainty) and gnostic atheism (one who doesn’t believe in a god and knows god doesn’t exist).

It is a bad sign for Christians that this is even a discussion since THE MOST IMPORTANT Christian holiday is Easter BY MILES!!!!!. I want Atheists to mock Easter instead of Christmas since Christmas is not that religiously important. Yet we Christians inflate and commercialize Christmas into something it was never intended to be and it’s become a bastardized version of what it used to be. We deserve to be mocked actually.

Jeremiah 10:2-4: “Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.”

Christmas tree. Hah! My mother in law is in her sixties and finally learned that the only things that are truly Christian from Christmas is the nativity scene and the pr-dinner prayer. That’s right, the tree, lights, decorating, celebrating, gift giving… all pagan from before your Christmas celebration due to the Catholic church muscling their way in more than 300 years after Jesus died. Many of you wouldn’t even BE Christian if it were not for the crusades. You have your fictional god to talk to and we have a parody.

As a practicing Christian, at then end of each our lives, it will be interesting to see which one is right, although I already know. I can’t help but put for this question to you and those like you, have you ever asked yourself, what if I’m wrong….

No Joe, actually you don’t know anything about what happens at the end of our lives. Nobody does, and anyone who tells you different is a huckster trying to separate you from your money. As an Atheist myself, I think you just die. That’s it. Lights come on, you live, and then lights go out. That is what makes the most sense to me from my observations, but I’m not nearly so arrogant as to claim that it’s the unquestionable truth of what happens. Maybe if more of you Xians should learn some humility people wouldn’t be so turned off by your chosen beliefs.

You ask the atheist, “what if you’re wrong”? You say you’re a practicing Christian. Have you ever asked yourself, “What if I’m wrong”? There are more than 20 major religions today, and those are only the present day religions. Never mind the Greeks, Romans, Norse, Egyptians, Incans, Mayans, just to name a few other major religions that have gone by the wayside. Of all the religions out there to choose from, what if you’re the one who is wrong? What if you should have been praising Thor or praying to Ra your whole life, but you chose Christianity.

You ask an atheist “What if you’re wrong”, and I pose you the same question. What if you’re wrong, Joe?

If I’m wrong and God is just, he won’t punish me for being rational and honest and following my conscious to the best truth I can discern. I would tell him, “If you wanted me to believe in you, you should have provided me with proof or given me a more credulous mind.”

If I’m wrong and God is unjust, I wouldn’t want to spend eternity with him anyway. Nor would it have been possible to predict what behavior an unjust god would reward.

What’s good about my position is that the statements above hold true for ALL POSSIBLE GODS. If God is really Allah, Zeus, Baal or Quetzalcoatl, I’ll still reach paradise as long as he’s just.

But what about your position, Joe? If God is anyone but Jehovah, you’re screwed. Where I remained neutral and fair, you chose the wrong side.

And even if Jehovah is the One True God, he might still be unjust and send you to Hell on a lark. Or you may have misunderstood how to worship him… do you respect the *correct* Sabbath? Did you go through life dunking your communion wafer into the wine, instead of consuming each separately? I hope you haven’t worn any cotton/polyester blends.

As a humanity, we have all been indoctrinated, for all of history by ‘theological’ exegesis, particularly by those with their own ‘religious’ claims and agendas, to accept that a literal proof of God is not possible for faith. And thus all discussion and apologists ‘theodicy’ is contained within this self limiting intellectual paradigm and bubble of presumption, especially evident in the frictions between science and religion. It would now appear that all sides squabbling over the God question, religious, atheist and history itself have it wrong! That bubble could burst at any time!

The first wholly new interpretation for two thousand years of the moral teachings of Christ is published on the web. Radically different from anything else we know of from history, this new teaching is predicated upon a precise and predefined experience, a direct individual intervention into the natural world by omnipotent power to confirm divine will, command and covenant, “correcting human nature by a change in natural law, altering biology, consciousness and human ethical perception beyond all natural evolutionary boundaries.” So like it or no, a new religious claim testable by faith, meeting all Enlightenment criteria of evidence based causation now exists. Nothing short of a religious revolution is getting under way. More info at http://www.energon.org.uk

“…the Darwinian alternative is intended to promote evolution and to show unequivocally that the owner of the vehicle is not Christian, not a creationist and most definitely does not believe in a deity…”
—————–
The Darwin fish simply supports the idea of evolution and gently mocks the most vocal opponents of it. It says nothing about whether the person is christian or believes in any deity. It is not an atheist symbol, but a symbol of the rationality of science.

In response to those saying trees are only for Christians: you do realize that the tree and the date itself were for a pagan holiday that Christians took over right? So by your logic, only Christians can use other religions’ symbols as their own? Got it. Happy winter solstice!

Well!
Pasta on the tree instead of a star?
Great!
But you understand that it’s UGLY, right??
Really really ugly?
But hey, each to his/her own!

Atheists don’t bug me.
Their claim that there is no god doesn’t bug me.
The one thing about them that bugs me is their mind-boggling and insufferable conceit and intolerance of MY beliefs.
Atheists are the most narrow-minded hateful people I’ve ever known, it is incredible.
Sad, also.
Christ-myth????
How dare you bash Christ?
How dare you bash those of us who have had dynamic and vital encounters with the Living, Most High God!!??
How dare you???
Who DOES that??
You wanna worship spaghetti, FINE and allow me to follow Christ, OK?
Christ myth, have a great time with that, sad pitiful bitter atheist.

“The one thing about [atheists] that bugs me is their mind-boggling and insufferable conceit and intolerance of MY beliefs.”

I’m a skeptic, who respects claims of truth proportional to the evidence supporting them. You claim to know that God exists, but you have no more proof of that than a child has for Santa Claus.

The conceit in this discussion is your demand that I respect your beliefs without the sort of proof I would demand for any other claim. You are demanding (on threat of a hissy-fit) that I trust your beliefs more than I trust anyone’s, including my own. And you call ME conceited?

You complain that atheists don’t respect your beliefs, but you make no effort to respect anyone else’s. How DARE you claim in public that Jesus was the Christ? You’re being disrespectful of everyone who believes Jesus was *not* the son of God.

The reason atheists like me treat Christians like you so rudely is that you deserve it. We’re giving you a taste of how you treat everyone else.

“Atheists are the most narrow-minded hateful people I’ve ever known, it is incredible.”

Hey, *I* am narrow-minded and hateful, but only a bigot would generalize that statement to ALL atheists.

As for who’s narrow-minded, don’t be ridiculous. I’ll believe whatever the evidence justifies. If real evidence points to Jesus being divine, show it to me and I’ll accept it as truth. And I’m just as receptive to evidence proving that Zeus rules from Olympus or Jesus did his final preaching in North America, per the Mormons.

Can you say the same? Is there any evidence that would make you *stop* believing Jesus was Christ, or convert to Islam or Jovianism?

Who exactly held a gun to your head and forced you to comment on a story about atheism? Oh that’s right, no one did. You chose to post, so clearly: 1) it does bug you and 2) you do not believe atheists should be able to express their beliefs without you having to comment on it. Otherwise, we never would have been blessed with your vitriol. That would’ve been nice for a change.

That’s exactly what I was thinking? Why partake in the symbolic giving of gifts (3 wise men), the tree (everlasting life)and other holiday traditions if you don’t believe? Christmas, no matter what Black Friday sales and travel agents tells you, is about the birth of a Savior. Seems a bit hypocritical to me… more agnostic than atheistic!

Maybe they’re having a Solstice Celebration? Seriously, Christmas gave up being the sole property of Christians about the time the representative saint of Christmas became a fat guy in a red suit skurrying around, leaving gifts for everyone.

I have nothing against Santa Claus but, IMO, anyone can celebrate the “Season of Giving” whatever their beliefs.

Because Christmas is not just a Christian holiday. It was originally a pagan holiday celebrating the Winter Solstice. The celebration of Christmas was actually banned on more than one occasion within Protestant Christendom due to concerns that it was too pagan or unbiblical.

“I am confused. If you are an atheist, why are you celebrating Christmas?”

“Christmas” comprises many different events:

- a national holiday and a paid day off work
- decorating your house with colorful lights
- installing a temporary indoor evergreen tree
- exchanging gifts with loved ones
- feasting
- partying
- family gatherings
- a time when children can be especially fun
- a day to commemorate the birth of Jesus

I enjoy all these activities except the last one. Why shouldn’t I celebrate Christmas as a secular holiday, when so few of its activities have anything to do with Christ?

Indeed, we must consider the real “reason for the season”: the Earth’s 23.5 degree axial tilt. This tilt causes the northern hemisphere to have shorter hours of daylight (and receive much less sunlight during daytime)in winter, compared to summer. In humans, lack of sunlight can case “Seasonal Affective Disorder”, a form of depression.

The pre-Christian Germanic “barbarians” suffered from this during the prolonged darkness of winter. To fight off this depression they held a big party around the winter solstice, the shortest (darkest) day of the year. They honored evergreen trees because they were the only sign of life and promised the eventual rebirth of spring. They visited friends, exchanged gifts, feasted, drank, danced and sang. And they built a roaring fire and put candles everywhere to fight the dark. This was called “Jul” (Yule) and everyone agreed it was a good idea.

When Christians came to Europe this holiday was an established tradition. It was popular and fun, so they re-dedicated it to Jesus (because to celebrate a pagan event would be heresy).

If you’re celebrating Jesus’s birth, why do you put lights on your house and decorate an evergreen tree? Why do you commemorate Christ’s lowly birth in a stable by putting on your best clothes, feasting like a king, and partying into the night? What’s with Santa Claus – is there something holy about lying to your children? Why do you decorate in red and green when Jesus (being a Jew) would have preferred blue?

Truth is, you and I are both just maintaining traditions we learned as children. Most of them have nothing to do with Jesus, they’re just fun — regardless of your religion. Since Christians didn’t invent them, they aren’t your exclusive property.

If we are not all Christians in the United States, why is Christmas a national holiday? I choose to celebrate love, life, family, peace and joy on the national holiday of the United States that is celebrated on December 25. If I decide to do that with a tree, gifts, lights, Santa Clauses, etc., what does that have to do with Jesus (Jesus isn’t the only person ever to give or receive a gift)? And, finally, why do you care even if I do want to celebrate Jesus’ birth? I’m all for celebrating somebody called the Prince of Peace, even if I don’t believe he is the son of an imaginary deity and also his death somehow “saved” me from my sins (I’m still looking for an explanation of exactly how that was supposed to have worked).

Atheism isn’t about winning people over, it’s about identifying with a group of other like-minded people to ridicule others for observing traditions or opting to live by a code beyond rational thought and self-determination, while avoiding the negative backlash of “trolling” by claiming morally superior group status despite wholly lacking a set of traditions and unified moral code.

atheists are cranks. They should shutup and let those who celerbrate CHRISTmas enjoy the season. although I don’t go to church I would rather have christians living in the house next to me rather than atheists.

May you be touched by his noodly appendage and blessed with his secret sauce….. sounds almost as hokey as being blessed by the spirit and moved by the sacrifice….. live a little, laugh a lot. Do good to others.

Why do atheists, who profess to believe in nothing, go out of their way to broadcast to all that they are atheists? Same goes for vegans, religious fundamentalists, people with honor roll kids, etc. It seems that they are trying to 1)call attention to their inflated sense of self and cleverness, or are 2) trying to convince themselves of something they are not quite sure of.

First, realize that what makes people outgoing about their beliefs is seldom really about the belief itself. Might as well ask why some people are compelled to tout the virtues of their favorite sports teams to anyone who will listen, or to tap out 140 characters everytime they go to the toilet. People are people, and you only tend to notice the ones that like to be noticed, not the overwhelming majority that are not obnoxious about it. Likewise, many people are annoyed when anyone unlike themselves get positive attention, and see it as an attack on their difference. The idea, for exemple, that someone should dress differently than they in public is seen as an attack on decent dress, or the idea that someone might have an opposing view that is given consideration as an example of an attack on “common sense”, or someone holding hands in public as “shoving their sexuality in our face”, etc. Again, people being people and other people reacting as people react.
Usually, when we are annoyed by someone who is doing no harm, it is our own character as much as theirs that is behind the annoyance.

Why don’t you christians just leave Athiests alone?? Let us have some peace during your holiday(s) and stop bombing us with christmas music, traffic jams, flooded airlines and tired, angry people lined up for their “seasonal” Starbucks latte. Stop trying to prove how pious you are and relax. Happy New Years.

No one is forcing you to tune into (free) radio stations of any sort, or to visit any particular location that may be playing Christmas music. Those traffic jams and long lines you refer to are made up of atheists as well as theists, because last I checked EVERYONE gets the same holidays off regardless of their personal beliefs or whether they observe a particular holiday, and most make use of that time off for their own purposes. Stop trying to make a point of trolling people to make a point. That is not very rational or self-deterministic of you.

Besides, “Pastamas” is more inclusive. I don’t want to exclude those who believing in fettucini gods, rigatoni gods, or even Kraft, god of elbow macaroni. Let’s not get into schismatic debates about whether semolina is holier than whole-grain durum or buckwheat. No matter how you define “al dente”, you’re welcome to not worship next to me!